Attitudes and perceptions regarding algorithmic judicial judgementbarriers to innovation in the judicial system?

  1. Sandra Pérez Domínguez 1
  2. Pere Simón Castellanos 2
  1. 1 Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche
    info

    Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche

    Elche, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01azzms13

  2. 2 Universidad Internacional de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad Internacional de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/029gnnp81

Journal:
IDP: revista de Internet, derecho y política = revista d'Internet, dret i política

ISSN: 1699-8154

Year of publication: 2023

Issue Title: "Digitalització i algoritmització de la justícia"

Issue: 39

Type: Article

DOI: 10.7238/IDP.V0I39.417206 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: IDP: revista de Internet, derecho y política = revista d'Internet, dret i política

Abstract

This study aims to be a starting point in the process of studying attitudes and perceptions around the use of algorithmic tools in the judicial system and explores possible barriers to innovation. The results reveal significant differences in acceptance between the general population, experts in data analytics and artificial intelligence (AI) and legal professionals, with notable variations in the acceptance of algorithmic tools for judicial analysis. In addition, participants with a legal background showed a negative correlation with acceptance, indicating a more cautious stance towards the integration of such tools in the criminal justice domain. This suggests a cautious and reserved attitude among legal professionals towards the integration of algorithmic tools in the justice system, potentially rooted in concerns regarding objectivity, fairness and the preservation of legal principles in judicial processes. Furthermore, the study reveals that the acceptance of algorithmic tools is influenced by the complexity of the tasks involved in the automation of the criminal justice system. This underlines the importance of considering the level of automation and the degree of human intervention in the use of these tools. In short, this study highlights the importance of having the choice of society and more specifically of legal operators to encourage the adoption and effective implementation of algorithmic tools in the judicial sphere.

Bibliographic References

  • BARYSÉ, D.; SAREL, R. (2023). “Algorithms in the court: does it matter which part of the judicial decision-making is automated?”. Artificial Intelligence and Law. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09343-6
  • BERIAIN, I. D. M. (2018). “Does the use of risk assessments in sentences respect the right to due process? A critical analysis of the Wisconsin v. Loomis Ruling”. Law Probab Risk, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 45-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgy001
  • BOIX PALOP, A. (2020). “Los algoritmos son reglamentos: La necesidad de extender las garantías propias de las normas reglamentarias a los programas empleados por la administración para la adopción de decisiones”. Revista de Derecho Público. Teoría y Método, vol. 1, pp. 223-269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37417/RPD/vol_1_2020_33
  • CATERINI, M. (2022). “El sistema penal en la encrucijada ante el reto de la inteligencia artificial”. IDP. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política, no. 35, pp. 1-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7238/idp.v0i35.392754
  • CASTRO TOLEDO, F. J. (2022). (Dir.). La transformación algorítmica del sistema de justicia penal. Cizur Menor: Aranzadi
  • CERRILLO I MARTÍNEZ, A. (2019). “El impacto de la inteligencia artificial en el derecho administrativo ¿nuevos conceptos para nuevas realidades técnicas?”. Revista General de Derecho Administrativo, no. 50.
  • COTINO HUESO, L. (2022). “Nuevo paradigma en las garantías de los derechos fundamentales y una nueva protección de datos frente al impacto social y colectivo de la inteligencia artificial”. In: Bauzá Reilly, M. (coord.) and Cotino Hueso, L. (dir.). Derechos y garantías ante la inteligencia artificial y las decisiones automatizadas, pp. 69-105. Cizur Menor: Aranzadi.
  • GONZÁLEZ FUSTER, G. (2020). “Artificial Intelligence and Law Enforcement - Impact on Fundamental Rights”. Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Directorate-General for Internal Policies [online]. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/656295/IPOL_STU(2020)656295_EN.pdf
  • HERMSTRÜWER, Y.; LANGENBACH, P. (2022). “Fair governance with humans and machines”. MPI Collective Goods Discussion Paper, no. 2022/4, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law (forthcoming). DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4118650
  • KIM, B.; PHILLIPS, E. (2021). “Humans’ assessment of robots as moral regulators: importance of perceived fairness and legitimacy”. arXiv. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2110.04729
  • MARCHENA GÓMEZ, M. (2022). “Inteligencia Artificial y jurisdicción penal”. Speech given by Manuel Marchena Gómez on the occasion of his admission as a Full Academician of the Royal Academy of Doctors of Spain on 26 October 26 2022.
  • MIRÓ LLINARES, F. (2022). “Policía predictiva: realismo frente a utopías y distopías”. In: Castro Toledo, F. J. (dir.). La transformación algorítmica del sistema de justicia penal, pp. 177-198. Cizur Menor: Aranzadi.
  • PONCE SOLÉ, J. (2019). “Inteligencia artificial, Derecho administrativo y reserva de humanidad: algoritmos y procedimiento administrativo debido tecnológico”. Revista General de Derecho Administrativo, no. 50.
  • REILING, A. D. (2020). “Courts and artificial intelligence”. International Journal for Court Administration, vol. 11, no. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.343
  • SORIANO ARNANZ, A. (2023). “Creando sistemas de inteligencia artificial no discriminatorios: buscando el equilibrio entre la granularidad del código y la generalidad de las normas jurídicas”. IDP. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política, no. 38, pp. 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7238/idp.v0i38.403794
  • SIMÓN CASTELLANO, P. (2021). Justicia Cautelar e Inteligencia Artificial: La Alternativa a Los Atávicos Heurísticos Judiciales. First edition. Barcelona: J.M. Bosch.
  • SIMÓN CASTELLANO, P. (2022). La prisión algorítmica: Prevención, reinserción social y tutela de derechos fundamentales en el paradigma de los centros penitenciarios inteligentes. First edition. València: Tirant lo Blanch.
  • SIMÓN CASTELLANO, P. (2023). La evaluación de impacto algorítmico en los derechos fundamentales. First edition. Cizur Menor: Aranzadi. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1tqcxbh
  • ULENAERS, J. (2020). “The impact of artificial intelligence on the right to a fair trial: towards a robot judge?”. Asian Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 11, no. 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ajle-2020-0008
  • YAlCIN, G.; THEMELI, E; STAMHUIS, E. et al. (2022). “Perceptions of justice by algorithms”. Artif Intell Law, no. 31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09312-z
  • ZARSKY, T. (2016). “The Trouble with Algorithmic Decisions: An Analytic Road Map to Examine Efficiency and Fairness in Automated and Opaque Decision Making”. Science, Technology, & Human Values, vol, 41, no. 1, pp. 118-132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915605575
Data source: Dialnet